who is the music for ?

[damien]

Following on from a thread judging the merits of the album "erpland" ,

I pose this question "which is more important , making music that people enjoy listening to , or music that people enjoy making ? "

My initial answer would be if you are making music that you enjoy ,then you will find other people who share your view .
But take a catchy song , in might not be your "taste" in music but it is well crafted .
you can "dress" this song any you like , say for instance the chords to "all along the watchtower" not a million miles from the "end of stairway to heaven" certain chord progression (cadences) are very common .
so are the rules to songwriting to some degree already pre defined ?
i believe there's a theory that all stories ever told can have their origin traced back to about 8 greek stories .
In just the same token then can we track all song back to a 4 simple cadences ?

the perfect cadence the Root to perfect 5th ( "hi ho its off to work we go" - snow white )

the plagual cadence the root to perfect 4th ( "amazing grace " - traditional)
the imperfect perfect 5th to root .

or interupted perfect 5th to any note other than root .

[watermill]

Dunno mate, but Abba would like to thank ya for it ;D

[kirk]

I understand the direction of your question Damien but have a look at "making music that people enjoy listening to" and ponder what you mean exactly there...

Is it possible for the artist to know that the artist is ever doing this ?

Perhaps you could rephrase this as "making music that fits into neat little boxes and so by definition fits into the box that appears to be currently vogue"
Or as "music that sounds similar to something that sold lots of units before".
Or as "music that does not include much dissonance, but that does contain much consanance
and is therefore more pleasing to non musicians and musicians who don't like 20th century classical or jazz or world music"

Are you researching a degree course by the way ? Stockhousen developed a system of music that does not fit into your analysis of how music is composed. although it would include the intervallic relationships outlined if analyed as such. The system is called "tone rows"

I can tell you that this kind of music can be very hard to hear and is unlikely to generate a number one single.

[watermill]

For me it all depends on the artist, eg:

You've got ya plastic pop band's that are very good at covering ballads, and bringing out albums in tme for xmas. It sells a bucket load and wages get paid. So the company exec, the brains of the bunch, tells his plastic popstars, "i've got a great idea, listen to this, the next albums gonna bigger, its gonna be a double album of lazy ballad covers ready in time for next xmas,". That scenario aint about music, thats about money, full stop.
The next scenario is about say someone like Eric Clapton, his niche he's carved out for himself is middle of the road fairly easy listening blues rock and he's tied up in a multimillion dollar contract for which he has to release ten studio albums, he's made his money bringing out blues/rock middle of the road albums and more importantly the record campany has made even more, so they're gonna want him to carry on just doing that, but only a little while ago, he done this Robert Johnson project which is old school blues, it was never gonna be as big as a straight Eric Clapton album but it was something close to his heart, he obviously was inspired by the guy when he was younger and that weren't about making music for money or the fans, that was for himself. So to him that was important.
With the Ozrics, they can pretty much release what they like, it hasn't got to be of certain formula, as fans we want them to carry on bringing out spacey/rock/techno/world music with no singing innit. now whether thats regarded as trendy or old fashioned dinosaur prog rock, it don't matter because Ed and the guys haven't got to cater to any execs whim. Ed and the guys turned left where say Oasis turned right and were stuck, definately maybe was big, Whats the story was massive and that was it, the company exec, the brains ha ha, now wanted the next album out by sarnso it had to be same as last two but bigger, no deviations, you try something just a tad experimental and i'll effin ave ya, now they can only release a certain type of music, if they wanted to release an Ozric type album, not they ever would, they would never be allowed by their bossess. So they're trapped artistically speakin to a degree.
Like i said earlier, the Ozrics turned left, and the fruits of that is the position they are in now, musical freedom, unformulatic albums and releasing exactly what they want for themselves and for their close knit of fans...us.

[damien]

in essence i am saying you can take many ozric tunes and they sound very similar to turkish music , the style maybe be "ozric" but the music has already exsisted in one form or another for hundreds of years , even music based in technology imitates various folk music from around the world .
so i am saying it is a case of making connections .
sometimes songs tap into cultral hertitage of an audience that the audience themselves have forgotten or are unaware of , like some kind of musical dna !

i am studying for my teacher's diploma , this nov/dec, next year i was thinking of going for the abrsm teachers diploma .

Its to easy to get caught in the style of the music instead of getting to the "heart" of the matter .
maybe oasis feel like they are doing what ever suits them , maybe ozrics feel like they are a corperate machine .
as fans we tend to become more intrested it the teller than the tale .
take classical music , the artists pass in time but the songs remain .

[watermill]

God, i just read my last post, talk about, round the houses, theres a point there somewhere...sorry.

[kirk]

I don't think that the Ozrics feel like they are a corporate machine, Why would they ?
it's not as if they are rolling around on fat matresses full of loot is it ?

As for Oasis doing what suits them, they play what they play because thats all they can play, and people pay for it. A bit like Kentucky Mc Burger making the Fille' o burger because thats what people pay for and that's the only thing they know how to make. Which is fine for those who prefer the taste of Oasis flavoured fille' o burger, it's just not to my taste.

I don't think i've been caught up in Ozric style whatever it may be, I have tried to figure out how they compose and what the notes are, but have generally failed miserably at this. I have always believed the music has real soul and heart, and having met the various band members over a 21 yr period can say hand on heart that non of it is contrived or pretentous in the least, and that the musos involved play from the heart and I think that is audibly evident in the recordings.

I

[damien]

the way i see it both ozrics and oasis are talented groups each have got to a point where they have a fan base and when they play live they will try to play some songs the audience recognises and some new ideas too .
To be realistic evenone has off days , its only human .
in terms of "fille o burger " i see that as a pure matter of perspective .
trying to figure how ozric music is composed , you can read some of the interviews , and just look at the influences .
there are certain themes that reoccur in ozric music , of course new ideas will come along to.
the music/ians have real heart and soul ,but where we can agree to disagree is that they have any less or more heart and soul than any other musician .
that you can hear the music played from the heart may speak as much about the openess of your heart , just a thought !

[kirk]

I don't agree Damien, Your thread was started with the poser "Who is the music for ?" and in response would have to say - for the Artist.

It is all subjective as you say and I have said before.

If you compose and record music you do this for yourself, and if others choose to like it so be it. This is the same as any other artform, the artist is representing their relationship with the medium of choice, and is choosing to represent something of their selve or their feelings.

The difference between music and as an art form and pop music is very slight but can be defined. Pop (whether rock or whatever label you want to apply) is confined to parameters that are popularly accepted by record labels, radio and the media and the buying public. May I refer the reader to Bill Drummonds book on this.

If you are preparing music or any art with the tastes of others in mind then The music is not for the artist, some of the playing may be, but in general, note choice, key and time signature will be predetermined by the value of the profit margin expected by the Boss with the big fat cigar. Can you see where I am going ?...

Yes perhaps the band you chose to use as an example are unlikely to ever produce a recording in B flat minor in 13/8, but only because it would not sell (and possibly because they can only play in either E, D or G). Just because a product (whatever it is) sells does not make it a thing with intrinsic value. However, Music (and the appreciation of music) is slightly different than other "products". I believe it all to be a matter of what you have heard already.
You may consider yourself to be a huge fan of a particular band or artist but if you hear a band you'd never heard before its more than possible that you change allegance.

In short Oasis are not popular because they write from the heart, they are popular because a huge amount of money has been pumped into advertising their product and bribing media types into playing their records on the radio (didn't you know that this is how you get famous these days ?). They are also believed to be "cool and street" because the people they employ tell the media they are, this is taken on board by impressionable youth who have never even heard "all along the watchtower". And yes, everybodys opinion is valuable but some opinions and stances are better informed (or perhaps not). The key here is this, if you read 2 books in your lifetime and proclaim both of them to be the best books anyone ever wrote, is your opinion subjective, valid, or realistic ?

Music since the beginings of the Youth movement in the 1950's has been marketed as a product that is sexy and that will help you get laid, It has even had labels applied to it by record company mogols in order to identify "target audience demographics".

I think you know all this already Damien but are playing devils advocate like a music teacher would do.
Did Batehoven write for himself or his patrons ? Both, but his patrons did not dictate note choice, key and time signature did they ?
.

[damien]

how about this for a persective :
there is a feeling from which a person wants to express .
but for there to be "harmony" this should be coupled with empathy towards others .
"i feel music is as much in the ear that listens than the lips which utter ,
inbetween the two there is this space where the vibrations in the air almost become alive ."
i was thinking this was really cosmic because its like the music is there in the natural order of nature,
you could say an artist is like a peach tree , it well it makes peaches that's what it does , if some prefers apples , well sorry but its just peaches on the menu .
but then maybe an artist is a person who spies a peach tree and an apple tree and says what kind of fruit do you want ,
the playing of the music being like "what can i do/give to bring a little happieness to this person " ,

anyway enuff rambles for me

[watermill]

Wow man, thats some serious sh*t your on

[philly]

damien said:

anyway enuff rambles for me

Is that a promise Damien?

[damien]

[kirk]

I agree with Watermill !

Gimme' them peaches man !

Even the air is dreaming...